A Discussion Regarding Molten Metal Found in the Rubble of the WTC on 9/11
CANNABIS CULTURE – I wrote this article many years ago as a way to promote discussion on Facebook. Since that time, I have been banned from Facebook – I don’t even know why. But I managed to save the article, and since this is the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 World Trade Center attack, I thought I would take this opportunity to share it with the CC audience. I’ve checked to make sure the links still work, and have replaced the ones that don’t whenever possible.
This article deals with the molten steel found in the rubble left by the collapsed Twin Towers. Jet fuel can’t melt steel. Moten steel at the WTC site is evidence of an inside job, and the denial of its existence is the weakest link in the official story.
At least one of the sources for the official story relies heavily on the part of the NIST report that deals with the molten metal.
The problem with relying on NIST for information on the molten steel is the fact that they refused to look at all the evidence – the “NIST is willfully ignorant” factor. An example of that is provided by this video (which is a review of the NIST position on molten steel and evidence to the contrary of that position).
“911 Incontrovertible Proof NIST lied – John Gross Lead Engineer”
The NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) lead engineer John Gross claims to be open to being subjected to evidence to the contrary of the official story, says he will provide his email address, and then, according to a witness, refuses to provide his email address.
Another example of this “willfully ignorant” factor – perhaps not NIST but by the authorities in charge of the analysis of the collapsed buildings immediately afterwards – is the lack of any effort to send in a forensic unit to ascertain why the building collapsed (discussed at 121:30 of this “most comprehensive” report on the “not-official-view” of 9/11):
9/11: Explosive Evidence — Experts Speak Out (Full)
Indeed, NIST’s unwillingness to hear from certain eye-witnesses or look at certain evidence is reminiscent of the Warren Commission – not to mention the fact that the steel evidence post-collapse was whisked away … just like JFK’s brain. And then there’s the fact NIST is sitting on the evidence and won’t share it:
“To this end, NIST must release the 6,899 photographs and over 300 hours of video recordings – acquired mostly by private parties – which it admits to holding (NIST, 2005, p. 81).”
Accepted for publication: Steven E. Jones, (2006). “Why Indeed did the WTC Buildings Collapse?,” The Hidden History of 9-11-2001, Research in Political Economy, Volume 23, P. Zarembka, editor, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2006. DRAFT Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse? By Steven E. Jones Department of Physics and Astronomy Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84604
Anyhow, a more comprehensive review of the molten steel evidence can be found between 121:53 and 132:16 of this video.
I find it includes many more examples – and the views of many more experts – than any of the sources that support the official story provide. Looking at a different “official view” website – one that doesn’t rely heavily on the NIST report – we gain a deeper understanding of what the molten steel debate is really about.
This source states: “To finish, none of these stories prove there was molten (as in liquid) steel at the WTC. There’s no evidence temperatures were hot enough to produce that (whatever the energy source), and some of the stories claiming “molten steel” have built-in implausibilities. There was certainly glowing metal, but this only indicates temperatures within the range of a fire.”
Nowhere on this page does this analysis consider the evidence of “molten steel” provided by the fire-fighters interviewed in the above videos. When it comes to the clean-up crew, interviewed by the people at “Waste 360”, he dismisses their account because they use the term “molten steel beam”, arguing it cannot be both molten and a beam:
“‘Once the area was cleaned, normal commercial trash collections resumed by the haulers that are licensed and regulated by the Trade Waste Commissioner,’ Dawkins says. But for about two and a half months after the attacks, in addition to its regular duties, NYDS played a major role in debris removal — everything from molten steel beams to human remains — running trucks back and forth between Ground Zero and Fresh Kills landfill, which was reopened to accommodate the debris.”
D-Day: NY Sanitation Workers’ Challenge of a Lifetime Tom R. Arterburn | Apr 01, 2002
“A “molten” steel beam? If it’s a steel beam, then it’s not “molten” in the sense of being liquid metal. Does he just mean steel that appeared deformed, or was glowing when first removed from the debris pile?”
I think the most obvious answer to this question is that – as in most of the pictures you see when you type “molten steel” and “9/11” into Google image – one part of the steel beam is solid, and then there’s a hot part, and then there’s a liquid part dripping off the hot part – the molten part. Only someone who requires the entire steel beam to be a uniform temperature would dismiss that Waste 360 statement as being questionable – but no “non-official” version of events relies upon the “universal beam temperature” scenario.
This “one end of the beam is molten” version is supported by one of the record-keepers of the WTC wreckage, Greg Fuchek: “‘In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel,’ Fuchek said.”
Greg Fuchek is not mentioned on the 9/11 myths page.
Then there is the account of Joe “Toolie” O’Toole:
“Underground fires raged for months. O’Toole remembers in February seeing a crane lift a steel beam vertically from deep within the catacombs of Ground Zero. ‘It was dripping from the molten steel,’ he said.”
The 9/11 myths response was: ““Molten steel” in February, perhaps 5 months after the attacks? If it’s proposed that something like thermite/ thermate was responsible, then we can’t help wonder how much would be required to maintain high temperatures for so long. The advocates of controlled demolition don’t appear to have made any calculations in this area.”
Calculations such as this could be made, no doubt, if a new investigation was called and a sufficient budget provided for such an expensive experiment to answer a key question regarding an unprecedented event. Researchers who aren’t funded by the government and who are questioning the official story of the elites tend not to be able to conduct expensive experiments involving hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of thermite and/or thermate over a five month period. Regardless, challenging the doubters of the official story to come up with some calculations to explain what was witnessed does not make what was witnessed “implausible” – it just means there is further study needed, a position maintained by those who doubt the official story, but not those who hold the official story up to be the truth.
Then there was the testimony of Ron Burger:
“A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, Burger said it reminded him most of the volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. ‘Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen’s and the thousands who fled that disaster,’ he said.
Burger was yet another eye-witness ignored by 9-11 myths and NIST. Neither 9/11 myths – nor NIST – mentions the evidence of melted steel in the FEMA report: FEMA confirms that molten steel was found at the WTC7 site:
“It is much more difficult to tell if melting has occured in the grain boundary regions in this steel as was observed in the A36 steel in the WTC 7.” Under the “Suggestions for Future Research” you find this… “The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure.”
Then there is the firefighter testimony: New York Fire Department Captain Philip Ruvolo said:
“You’d get down below and you’d see molten steel, molten steel, running down the channel rails, like you’re in a foundry, like lava.”
9/11 Molten Metal ”
Ruvolo – not in the anonymous 9/11 myth website … not in the NIST report.
Nor were these fire fighters: New York firefighters recalled in the documentary film “Collateral Damages, “heat so intense they encountered rivers of molten steel.”
I think serious researchers have to take evidence – such as the following – seriously:
“But it is very difficult to reach [even] this maximum temperature with a diffuse flame. There is nothing to ensure that the fuel and air in a diffuse flame are mixed in the best ratio… This is why the temperatures in a residential fire are usually in the 500 °C to 650 °C range [Cote, 1992]. It is known that the WTC fire was a fuel-rich, diffuse flame as evidenced by the copious black smoke…. It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425 °C and loses about half of its strength at 650 °C [Cote, 1992]. This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse… The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable… Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650 °C fire.” (Eagar and Musso, 2001; emphasis added.) … The very high temperatures (corresponding to salmon-yellow colors) of the molten metal observed in videos and photographs are difficult to explain in the context of the official theory that fires finally caused the collapse of the WTC Towers and WTC 7. Highly exothermic reactions other than jet-fuel or office-material fires, such as thermite reactions which produce white-hot molten metal as an end product, are clearly implied by the data. In addition, the use of explosives such as HMX or RDX should be considered. “Superthermites” are also explosive as must be remembered in any in-depth investigation which considers hypotheses suggested by the available data.
The official reports by NIST, FEMA and the 9-11 Commission strikingly omit mention of large quantities of molten metal observed in the basement areas of WTC 7 and the Towers. The facts that the official reports do not address the molten metal pools or their chemical compositions provide compelling motivation for continued research on the WTC collapses.”
Serious researchers must take this comprehensive analysis seriously: Conclusion None of the official claims about the non-existence of molten iron or steel in the destroyed WTC buildings withstand scrutiny. The fact that the rubble contained steel or iron that had been melted shows that the buildings were destroyed by something other than fire and airplane impact. Especially dramatic evidence of various types was provided by several facts: that the original RJ Lee report showed that there was almost 1,500 times more iron in the dust than normal; that the rubble contained steel with gaping holes, manifesting a “Swiss cheese appearance” that shocked the three “fire-wise professors” from Worcester Polytechnic Institute; that lead had been vaporized; that molybdenum and been melted; and that the metal pools contained iron that had been heated, as shown by the orange color, above 2,000°C (3,632°F). When all of this physical evidence is combined with the testimony about explosions from many types of professionals, the claim that the Twin Towers were brought down by nothing other than the airplane impacts and resulting fires is simply not credible.
Then there are all these research papers: Some Misunderstanding Related to WTC Collapse Analysis (2013) Authors: Gregory Szuladzinski, Tony Szamboti, and Richard Johns International Journal of Protective Structures, vol 4 (2), pp 117-126 Temporal Considerations in Collapse of WTC Towers (2012) Author: Dr. Gregory Szuladzinski International Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 3 (3), pp 189-207 LPP Detecting Informed Trading Activities in the Options Markets (2012) Authors: Marc Chesney, Remo Crameri & Loriano Mancini Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper, No. 11-42 Was There Abnormal Trading in the S&P 500 Index Options Prior to the September 11 Attacks? (2011) Authors: Wing-Keung Wong, Howard E. Thompson & Kweehong Teh Multinational Finance Journal, vol. 15 (1/2), pp 1-46 Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe [ PDF ] (2009) Authors: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley & Bradley R. Larsen The Open Chemical Physics Journal, vol 2, pp 7-31 Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction (2008) Authors: Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, James R. Gourley The Open Civil Engineering Journal, vol 2, pp.35-40 Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials (2008) Authors: Kevin R. Ryan, James R. Gourley, and Steven E. Jones The Environmentalist Discussion of “Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions” (2008) (Critique of paper by Zdenek P. Bažant and Mathieu Verdure) Author: James R. Gourley, see also: Gregory Szuladzinski The Journal of Engineering Mechanics, vol 134 (10), pp 915–916 Unusual Option Market Activity and the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 [ PDF ] (2006) Author: Allen M. Poteshman The Journal of Business, vol 79 (4), pp 1703-1726
It’s not just me and the above people saying this: The architects and engineers below have signed the Petition demanding a new investigation into the destruction of all 3 World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11.
Architect and Engineer Signatories (3486)
I shall leave you with some quotes I used for an article I wrote on the 10 th anniversary of 9/11:
You know who is a truther? Michael Moore is a truther. Moore told reporters, “I’ve had a number of firefighters tell me over the years and since Fahrenheit 9/11 that they heard these explosions – that they believe there’s MUCH more to the story than we’ve been told. I don’t think the official investigations have told us the complete truth – they haven’t even told us half the truth.”
Hunter S. Thompson was another truther. He said in an interview that “… the disastrous crashes – I’m still not sure who did that – I think there’s allot more to it than we’ve been allowed to know … I’m very disturbed about the civil rights implications of this – I think everyone should be.” …
So I leave you with these words from Martin Luther King Jr., when he decided to speak out against the Vietnam War, from his speech “Beyond Vietnam”: “The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government’s policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one’s own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover, when the issues at hand seem as perplexing as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict, we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on. And some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation’s history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movements and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance, for we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us.”
If anyone feels like exploring this any further … I’m game.
David Malmo-Levine
[email protected]
Additional resources:
Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report The following content is from an in-depth investigation of the conspiracy theories surround the attacks of 9/11, which was published in the March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics. That cover story was expanded and published in August 2006 as a book titled Debunking 9/11 Myths. The fully revised and updated 2011 edition of the book is now on sale. FEB 3, 2005
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a49/1227842/
Operation Northwoods was a proposed false flag operation against the Cuban government that originated within the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) of the United States government in 1962. The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or other U.S. government operatives to both stage and actually commit acts of terrorism against American military and civilian targets,[2] blaming them on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba. The possibilities detailed in the document included the possible assassination of Cuban immigrants, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas,[2] hijacking planes to be shot down or given the appearance of being shot down,[2] blowing up a U.S. ship, and orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.[3] The proposals were rejected by President John F. Kennedy.[4][5][6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
A false flag operation is an act committed with the intent of disguising the actual source of responsibility and pinning blame on a second party. The term is popular amongst conspiracy theory promoters in referring to covert operations of various governments and cabals.[1]
The term “false flag” originated in the 16th century as a purely figurative expression to mean “a deliberate misrepresentation of someone’s affiliation or motives”.[2] It was later used to describe a ruse in naval warfare whereby a vessel flew the flag of a neutral or enemy country in order to hide its true identity. The tactic was originally used by pirates and privateers to deceive other ships into allowing them to move closer before attacking them. It later was deemed an acceptable practice during naval warfare according to international maritime laws, provided the attacking vessel displayed their true flag once an attack had begun.[3][4][5][6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag
“In the three-year period which followed the murder of President Kennedy and Lee Harvey Oswald, 18 material witnesses died – six by gunfire, three in motor accidents, two by suicide, one from a cut throat, one from a karate chop to the neck, three from heart attacks and two from natural causes. An actuary, engaged by the “London Sunday Times,” concluded that on November 22, 1963, the odds against these witnesses being dead by February 1967, were one hundred thousand trillion to one.” http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v1n2/deaths.html
“Once the area was cleaned, normal commercial trash collections resumed by the haulers that are licensed and regulated by the Trade Waste Commissioner,” Dawkins says. But for about two and a half months after the attacks, in addition to its regular duties, NYDS played a major role in debris removal — everything from molten steel beams to human remains — running trucks back and forth between Ground Zero and Fresh Kills landfill, which was reopened to accommodate the debris.” https://www.waste360.com/mag/waste_dday_ny_sanitation
“In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel,” Fuchek said.” 911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/evidence/gcn_handheldapp.html
“To arrange such a demolition would have taken months of effort, which would have been impossible to hide from the thousands of people who worked in the WTC.”
Posted on Tue, Dec. 10, 2002 WTC surveillance tapes feared missing SARA KUGLER Associated Press NEW YORK – Surveillance tapes and maintenance logs are among the missing evidence as investigators try to figure out why the World Trade Center collapsed, federal officials said Monday. Many documents destroyed in the disaster “are pretty key in carrying out the work,” lead investigator Shyam Sunder said. The 110-story towers collapsed after two hijacked jetliners plowed into the buildings in lower Manhattan on Sept. 11, 2001. Nearly 2,800 people were killed. Two hypotheses on the cause of the collapse have emerged since the National Institute of Standards and Technology began its $23 million probe three months ago. Both theories agree the jetliners damaged floor joints and columns inside and outside the buildings. But they vary on whether the fire-weakened columns failed and alone brought down the buildings or whether floor trusses sagged in the intense heat, pulling the columns inward to collapse. The lost records probably contain vital information that could help answer questions, Sunder said. Investigators are trying to locate copies of many destroyed documents from the building’s owners and city agencies. Also missing are the original contract specifications for the buildings from the early 1970s. Many believed the towers were built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 – the largest aircraft at the time, but much smaller than the jets that crashed into the buildings. Researchers plan to spend two years on the study. They will analyze trade center wreckage, rely on steel manufacturing experts and interview survivors, victims’ relatives and rescue workers. They have also created a database of more than 1,900 photographs shot that day as the towers burned and fell and are asking for more. They are especially interested in photographs showing the south face of 7 World Trade Center, which was not hit by a plane but burned for hours before collapsing. An earlier federal study directed by a civil engineering group was criticized for not examining evacuation procedures. ON THE NET NIST: http://www.nist.gov
web.archive.org/web/20030325065950/http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/news/local/4702997.htm
Bombs in the World Trade Center: Analysis By Washington’s Blog Global Research, May 24, 2011 Washington’s Blog 24 May 2011 Theme: Terrorism People Could Have Planted Bombs In the World Trade Center Without Anyone Noticing Preface: This essay does not argue that bombs brought down the Twin Towers or World Trade Building 7. It simply addresses the often-made argument that no one could have planted explosives without people noticing. Tightrope walker Philippe Petit snuck into the World Trade Center with a friend in 1974 with massive amounts of equipment, smuggled the equipment to the top floor and rigged up a highwire for his tightrope walking stunt without being detected. In 1978, the 59-story story Citicorp building was secretly retrofitted at night over the course of several months without the knowledge of tenants, the general public, or the media: In 2009, Raw Story noted: A Government Accountability Office investigator smuggled live bomb components into a federal building in just 27 seconds, then assembled a bomb in a restroom and ventured throughout the building without being detected, a leaked tape revealed Wednesday. In addition, congressional investigators were able to penetrate every single federal building they probed without any difficulty — 10 in all. And see this. In fact, there is additional evidence that bombs could have been planted in the World Trade Center without anyone knowing: Bomb-sniffing dogs were inexplicably removed from the Twin Towers five days before 9-11 The Twin Towers had been evacuated a number of times in the weeks preceding 9/11 There was a power down in the Twin Towers on the weekend before 9/11, security cameras were shut down, and many workers ran around busily doing things unobserved (confirmed here) A tenant of the World Trade Center hired a “sprinkler repairman” shortly before 9/11, and gave him access to 6 underground levels at World Trade Center building 1 And — as an interesting coincidence — a Bush-linked company ran security at the trade centers, thus giving it free reign to the buildings The chief electrical engineer who wired the World Trade Centers (Richard Humenn) says that people working on the elevators could have planted explosives: Mechanical engineer Gordon Ross, in his talk on the destruction of the Twin Towers, pointed out that: “Those [core] columns which were situated adjacent to and accessible from inside the elevator shafts failed at an early stage of the collapse. Those columns which were remote from the elevator shafts, and not accessible from the elevator shafts, survived the early stages of the collapse.”* Indeed, a top demolition expert says that with access to the elevator shaft, a team of loading experts would have access to the columns and beams: According to USA Today: “On Sept. 11, ACE Elevator of Palisades Park, N.J., had 80 elevator mechanics inside the World Trade Center“. And NIST itself says that, on 9/11, “Elevators 6A and 7A were out of service for modernization“. (NIST NCSTAR 1-8, p.97). In addition, Ace worked in and around structural steel: A run of approximately 80 vertical feet, employed over 300 running feet of 2-1/2″ x 8″ and 2″x 2″ trough raceway. This run traveled through plaster ceilings, concrete floors and around structural steel. Indeed, there had been numerous elevator renovation and and asbestos removal projects in the 6 years prior to 9/11 which allowed access to core building structures, including: 1995 1997 1998 1998 2000 These are just a few of the known, public examples of opportunities to plant bombs. There were undoubtedly many additional opportunities available to skilled operatives. And as experts such as one of the world’s top structural engineers – Hugo Bachmann, Professor Emeritus and former Chairman of the Department of Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology – notes, there could have been tenants of the World Trade Centers who planted bombs in their own, rented space, before moving out and vacating their office spaces. Related https://www.globalresearch.ca/bombs-in-the-world-trade-center-analysis/24933
ANATOMY OF A GREAT DECEPTION (NEW and UPDATED Sept 2014 David Hooper) 88,913 views•Sep 14, 2014 907 49 SHARE SAVE
Hooper’s film shows viewers why the fires that broke out in WTC 7 could not have been responsible for its destruction. It also highlights the many ways the official investigation by the National Institute of Standards and Technology fails to explain the physical evidence and eyewitness testimony, from the molten metal discovered under all three skyscrapers to the numerous explosions on the lower floors of each building—explosions that went off both before and during each respective collapse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BwZEgZgtT8
VERMONT ACCESS NETWORK (VAN): 9/11: EXPLOSIVE EVIDENCE – EXPERTS SPEAK OUT
The film features more than 40 experts who put the government’s 9/11 story to the test, examining scientific evidence surrounding the collapse of all three World Trade Center buildings. The film was produced by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth), a non-profit, non-partisan association of architects and engineers calling for a new, independent investigation into the collapse of the buildings. The organization claims that National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) excluded critical forensic evidence from their reports. This program also includes a local film premiere event at UVM in June 2012
https://www.cctv.org/watch-tv/programs/911-explosive-evidence-experts-speak-out
